Faculty Bibliography

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:Solid organ transplant (SOT) recipients undergoing total joint arthroplasty (TJA) may face elevated perioperative risk because of chronic immunosuppression, medical comorbidity, and organ-specific physiologic considerations. Although intravenous tranexamic acid (TXA) is widely used during TJA to reduce perioperative blood loss, evidence regarding outcomes among SOT recipients receiving TXA remains limited. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:A retrospective review was performed of 29,240 consecutive primary TJA patients who all received intraoperative intravenous TXA between June 2011 and March 2025. Patients undergoing unicompartmental knee arthroplasty, hemiarthroplasty, TJA for fracture, bilateral procedures, revision procedures, or those with less than 90 days of postoperative follow-up were excluded. SOT history was identified using diagnosis and procedural codes and verified by manual review. Outcomes included 90-day deep vein thrombosis (DVT), pulmonary embolism (PE), myocardial infarction (MI), operative time, and hospital length of stay (LOS). RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:Sixty-six patients with verified SOT were identified. The most common transplant types were kidney (59%), liver (24%), and heart (9%). One SOT patient experienced a 90-day VTE event compared with 95 control patients (1.5% versus 0.3%, P = 0.20). There were no PEs or MIs in the SOT cohort, compared with PE and MI rates of 0.2% and 0.01% in controls, respectively (P > 0.05 for both). Operative times were similar between groups (100.8 versus 108.5 min, P = 0.11), while LOS was significantly longer among SOT recipients (86.2 versus 43.8 h, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION/UNASSIGNED:In this retrospective cohort of primary TJA patients who all received intraoperative intravenous TXA, SOT recipients had low observed rates of VTE, PE, and MI. Because all patients received TXA and the SOT cohort was small, these findings should be interpreted as comparative observational safety data rather than evidence that TXA independently increases or does not increase thromboembolic risk in this population.

BACKGROUND:There is a growing number of patients who undergo multiple primary hip and knee joint arthroplasties during their lifetime. Whether patients who have multiple replaced joints are at an increased long-term risk of periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is not known. The purpose of this study was to compare rates of PJI in patients who have more than one primary arthroplasty. METHODS:We reviewed 36,129 patients who underwent primary total joint arthroplasty at a single institution from 2011 to 2024. Patients were categorized as having one to four primary hip or knee arthroplasties. The PJI incidence was compared using Chi-square testing and binary logistic regressions, and multivariate models adjusted for sex, body mass index, diabetes, renal disease, smoking status, and Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI). Sub-analyses compared patients who had one versus two, three, and four arthroplasties. RESULTS:When comparing patients who had one, two, three, or four primary joint arthroplasties, there was no significant difference in the rates of PJI between groups (P = 0.112). Multivariate analyses showed no statistically significant association between the number of arthroplasties and PJI (adjusted odds ratio (OR) for two, three, and four arthroplasties versus one: 1.34, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.02 to 1.74, P = 0.083; 1.98, 95% CI 0.77 to 4.12, P = 0.105; 1.57, 95% CI 0.09 to 7.24, P = 0.657, respectively). Sub-analyses comparing one versus three and one versus four arthroplasties showed no significant differences. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:In this single-institution cohort, additional primary hip or knee arthroplasties did not appear to substantially increase PJI risk. These findings suggest a potential trend that requires confirmation with larger, prospective, multicenter, or registry-based studies. Nevertheless, these results provide preliminary evidence to inform patient counseling and guide future research on the risks of multiple arthroplasties.

INTRODUCTION/BACKGROUND:While the learning curve for direct anterior approach (DAA) total hip arthroplasty (THA) is steep, no classification exists to predict technically challenging cases. We propose and validate a new Davidovitch direct anterior (DDA) classification system for predicting DAA THA case complexity. METHODS:We retrospectively reviewed primary DAA THAs by two fellowship-trained surgeons (October 2019 to June 2025). Exclusions included fracture, contralateral hardware, incomplete pelvis radiographs, or less than one year of follow-up. Cases were grouped into learning curve, proficient, and expert phases. Classification was based on preoperative antero-posterior (AP) pelvis radiographs. Operative time served as a proxy for case difficulty. Univariate and multivariate regressions assessed the effects of classification, surgeon experience, fixation method, and body mass index (BMI). RESULTS:Multivariate analyses of 283 cases, including DDA classification, surgeon experience, fixation method, and BMI, demonstrated that operative times were significantly longer for DDA 4 versus DDA 1 cases (P = 0.011). Operative time decreased across learning curve, proficient, and expert phases (P < 0.001). Higher BMI (P < 0.001) and cemented fixation (P = 0.004) independently increased operative time. There were 13 overall complications and two revision THAs within 90 days. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:This novel radiographic classification system predicted case difficulty in DAA THA, as DDA 4 cases took longer than DDA 1 cases, particularly during the learning curve. Beyond the learning curve, the impact of DDA classification on operative time diminished. This classification system has the potential to serve as a valuable preoperative tool for operative planning and workday efficiency, particularly for early-career surgeons on their learning curve.

BACKGROUND:The purpose of this study was to identify risk factors associated with wound complications following DAA THA and to evaluate the incidence of these wound issues when negative pressure wound therapy (NPWT) was used as the primary surgical dressing. METHODS:We reviewed 725 patients from five different surgeons at a single institution who underwent THA through a DAA from 2011 to 2023. Medical records were reviewed for demographics, comorbidities, surgical details, and a broad set of criteria denoting wound complications or dehiscence. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify potential risk factors. Secondary outcomes included periprosthetic joint infection (PJI), 90-day emergency room visits, readmission, and all-cause revision rates. RESULTS: 0.005). CONCLUSIONS:Obesity, length-of-stay, longer surgical time, and surgeon DAA experience <1 year were identified as risk factors for wound complications following DAA THA in our series. Prophylactic use of NPWT was not associated with a lower risk of wound complications in our cohort. Patients with wound complications had higher rates of PJI, readmission, and reoperation.

BACKGROUND:Prolonged retention of antibiotic-loaded articulating spacers after the first stage of a two-stage revision for periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) can occur because of patient preference, surgeon preference, or medical reasons that prevent the planned second stage. Little is known about the frequency of persistent infections, mechanical complications, and functional results in patients with retained spacers. QUESTIONS/PURPOSES/OBJECTIVE:At a minimum follow-up of 2 years after spacer placement, among patients who do not undergo the second stage revision (replacement of the spacer with a definitive prosthesis of the hip or knee): (1) What was the survival of the spacer free from unplanned reoperation or removal, the cumulative incidence of symptomatic infection, and the overall (Kaplan-Meier) survivorship of the patients? (2) What is the cumulative incidence of mechanical complications (spacer fracture or dislocation)? (3) What is the ambulatory status of patients who have retained their spacers? METHODS:Between March 2011 and July 2023, a total of 111 and 152 patients underwent first-stage revision with an articulating spacer placement as part of a planned two-stage procedure for chronic PJI after THA and TKA at our institution, respectively. Of these, 21% (23 of 111) in the THA group and 24% (37 of 152) in the TKA group did not undergo the anticipated second-stage reimplantation at our institution at least 1 year after spacer placement. Among the original cohorts, 2% (2 of 111) of patients who underwent THA and 3% (4 of 152) of patients who underwent TKA subsequently underwent second-stage reimplantation at outside institutions when reviewed, leaving 19% (21 of 111) in the THA group and 22% (33 of 152) in the TKA group with retained spacers. Of the original cohorts, 7% (8 of 111) in the THA group and 5% (8 of 152) in the TKA group did not have a 2-year follow-up, leaving 12% (13 of 111) of patients with THA and 16% (25 of 152) of patients with TKA available for analysis with a minimum of 2 years of follow-up or death in this retrospective study. The median (range) follow-up from spacer placement to the latest follow-up was 5 years (2 to 11) for patients with THA and 4 years (2 to 8) for patients with TKA. In the THA cohort, the median (range) age was 72 years (59 to 86), and eight patients were female; the median BMI was 32 kg/m2, and the median Charlson comorbidity index (CCI) was 3.5. In the TKA cohort, the median (range) age was 69 years (45 to 83), 13 patients were female, the median BMI was 31 kg/m2, and the median CCI was 4. Complication data following spacer placement were obtained from the electronic medical record and by telephone follow-up when needed. Clinical symptoms (swelling, erythema, warmth, fever, drainage, sinus tract, and pain), inflammatory markers (C-reactive protein and erythrocyte sedimentation rate), available radiographic findings, and laboratory test results (including synovial fluid analysis when obtained) were reviewed for evidence of infection or spacer-related mechanical failure. Infection after the spacer placement was defined as failure when the treating surgeon determined that an unplanned return to the operating room or spacer removal was warranted, acknowledging that postoperative evaluation thresholds varied among surgeons. Spacer-related mechanical failure was defined as spacer fracture or dislocation leading to reoperation or spacer removal. Patients were classified based on whether they underwent an unplanned reoperation or spacer removal. Patients who did not undergo unplanned reoperation or spacer removal were further categorized based on use of chronic suppressive antibiotics (decisions regarding chronic antibiotic therapy were made by the treating surgeon and/or infectious disease team). Patients who underwent reoperation were those who returned to the operating room because of concerning clinical, imaging, and/or laboratory findings of infection or mechanical complications, and the treating surgeon decided to proceed with revision surgery. All reoperation decisions were made by fellowship-trained arthroplasty surgeons with high-volume experience in two-stage revision. We used a competing-risks model to estimate survival of the spacer free from unplanned reoperation or removal attributable to infection or mechanical complications (calculated as 1 minus the corresponding cumulative incidence), with death treated as a competing event. Kaplan-Meier analysis was used to estimate patient survivorship, with death as the endpoint. Mortality data were obtained from medical records and hospital databases and were confirmed by telephone follow-up with family members and public records when needed. Ambulatory status before and after spacer placement was summarized descriptively and reported only for patients with both prespacer and postspacer data available (10 THAs and 25 TKAs); no formal hypothesis testing was performed for ambulatory or functional measures. RESULTS:At 2 years of follow-up, the survival of the spacer free from unplanned reoperation or removal was 89% (95% confidence interval [CI] 80% to 99%) for patients with THA and TKA combined, the cumulative incidence of infection was 5% (95% CI 0% to 12%), and the Kaplan-Meier survivorship of the patients was 92% (95% CI 84% to 100%). The cumulative incidence of mechanical complications (spacer fracture or dislocation) was 5% (95% CI 0% to 13%). In the THA cohort (10 patients), ambulatory status before the first stage included two patients using a wheelchair, two using a walker, one using crutches, two using a cane, and three walking without assistive devices. At latest follow-up, four patients used a wheelchair, two used a walker, two used a cane, and two walked without assistive devices. In the knee cohort (25 patients), ambulatory status before the first stage included two patients using a wheelchair, five using a walker, 13 using a cane, and five walking without assistive devices. At latest follow-up, two patients used a wheelchair, five used a walker, 13 used a cane, and five walked without assistive devices. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Retained articulating spacers can provide infection control in selected patients who do not proceed to reimplantation after first-stage spacer placement for PJI. Although infection-free spacer survival is achievable, these patients remain at risk for mechanical complications, including dislocation and fracture, as well as progressive functional decline. These risks should be clearly discussed during preoperative counseling to align expectations and support informed decision-making. Further studies are needed to refine patient selection, improve spacer durability, and standardize definitions of treatment success in PJI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE/METHODS:Level III, case series.

BACKGROUND:Obesity is a known risk factor for complications after total hip arthroplasty (THA), with societal guidelines recommending surgical delay for patients above body mass index (BMI) targets. Consequently, patients are motivated to reach BMI targets before the office visit, discussing surgical booking. Our study investigates BMI fluctuations between surgical booking and the surgery date and whether these fluctuations have implications for peri- and postoperative outcomes. METHODS:We retrospectively reviewed our institutional database for elective, primary, unilateral THA from 2015 to 2024 with a minimum 90-day follow-up. The cohort was stratified into three groups by percent BMI change from booking date to THA date: Group 1, decrease in BMI; Group 2, 0 to 5% increase in BMI; and Group 3, > 5% increase in BMI. Baseline demographic factors, as well as peri- and postoperative outcomes, were compared. A multivariate regression analysis evaluated risk factors for interval change in BMI. We reviewed 10,400 THA patients who had an average 62-day delay between booking and surgery dates, where 44.2, 42.2, and 13.6% were allocated to Groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively. RESULTS:Operative time, length of stay, and discharge to a rehab facility were significantly higher in Group 3 compared to the others. There were no significant differences seen in 90-day outcomes, including emergency department (ED) visits, readmissions, or revision rates. Multivariate regression analyses identified that elevated BMI at the time of surgery predicted increased septic revision incidence (OR [odds ratio]: 1.1, P < 0.001). Surgical delay and BMI change between booking and surgery did not influence all-cause and septic revision rates. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Our study is the first to evaluate preoperative BMI fluctuations between the booking date and surgery date. We found that most patients (55.8%) gained weight, with 13.6% increasing > 5% BMI. Importantly, these weight changes do not impact short-term complications or revision rates, comforting THA surgeons who see interval weight gain on the day of surgery.

BACKGROUND/UNASSIGNED:Dual-mobility (DM) articulations and porous acetabular shells are increasingly used to address instability and mechanical loosening in revision total hip arthroplasty (rTHA). However, reports of longer-term outcomes with the new generation of DM articulations and porous shells remain limited. Our study reports the use and outcomes of a cemented monoblock DM cup in a fully porous acetabular shell in complex rTHA cases with midterm follow-up. METHODS/UNASSIGNED:A retrospective study was conducted of rTHAs with an acetabular construct of a monoblock DM cup cemented into a fully porous acetabular shell between June 2016 and December 2019. Baseline demographics, operative information, and outcomes were gathered for a total of 55 patients. Ten patients died, and 4 were lost to follow-up at 5 years; 41 patients were included in the analysis of midterm outcomes. RESULTS/UNASSIGNED:The most common indications for rTHA were acetabular component loosening (43.6%), periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) (16.4%), dislocation (12.7%), and periprosthetic fracture (9.1%). Preoperative acetabular bone loss assessment found 43.7% type IIA, 9.1% IIB, 20.0% IIC, 23.6% IIIA, and 3.6% IIIB according to the Paprosky classification. Six patients (10.9%) were readmitted within 90 days for PJI (n = 5; 9.1%) or dislocation (n = 1; 1.8%). Four patients (9.8%) required revision of the construct: 2 for PJI, 1 case of instability, and 1 case of aseptic loosening of the acetabular component with significant acetabular bone loss. The average time to revision was 1.4 years (range, 0.1-3.8 years). The mean follow-up period was 6.4 years (range, 4.7-8.2 years). The cup in cup construct had an all-cause survivorship of 95.8% and 90.0% at 1 and 5 years, respectively, and aseptic survivorship rates of 97.9% and 94.7% at 1 and 5 years, respectively. CONCLUSIONS/UNASSIGNED:This cohort of 55 patients who underwent complex rTHA with a monoblock DM cup cemented into a porous acetabular shell exhibited reliable fixation and low revision rates. In complex revision cases where instability and inadequate fixation are concerns, these outcomes support continued consideration and use of this unique and durable construct.

Arthrofibrosis can be a major source of dissatisfaction for patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Manipulation under anesthesia (MUA) may be offered to improve motion in selected cases. Advancements in computer-navigated and robotic-assisted technology have been championed to improve component positioning with fewer soft tissue releases. We sought to investigate whether these technologies impact MUA rates. An institutional retrospective review was conducted on 18,815 patients who underwent a primary, elective, unilateral TKA between January 2010 and December 2022. Patients were stratified into conventional (n = 12,659), computer-navigated (n = 4,071), or robotic-assisted TKA (n = 2,085) cohorts. Patient demographics and implant data, including mode of fixation and level of constraint (cruciate-retaining [CR] vs. posterior-stabilized) were collected. MUA rates were the primary outcome. Data were analyzed using analysis of variance with Tukey post hoc testing and multivariate logistic regression analysis. We report a 1.7% overall MUA rate, with a rate of 1.6% for conventional and 1.5% for navigated TKA, which were significantly lower than robotic-assisted TKA at 3.2% (p < 0.001). However, on multivariate analysis, there was no difference in MUA rates for navigated and robotic-assisted when compared with conventional techniques. Cementless and hybrid fixation and CR implant designs were higher with robotic-assisted compared with conventional and navigated TKA. Multivariate regression revealed that TKA with fully cementless (odds ratio [OR]: 1.80 [95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.16-2.78]; p = 0.008) or hybrid fixation (OR: 2.92 [95% CI: 1.77-4.81]; p < 0.001) increased the risk for future MUA. Constraint also significantly influenced MUA rates, with CR designs yielding higher MUA rates (OR: 1.51 [95% CI: 1.16-1.96]; p = 0.002). When controlling for confounding factors, navigated and robotic-assisted TKA generated comparable odds for MUA when compared with conventional techniques. However, robotic-assisted TKA were more likely to utilize cementless or hybrid fixation and CR implant constraint, each of which were independently associated with increased odds of MUA. These operative factors should be considered when risk-stratifying and counseling patients on the likelihood of MUA. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE:  III.

BACKGROUND:Return to sports is a concern for many patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty (THA). As younger, active patients increasingly undergo THA, identifying factors that influence athletic recovery is critical. Although prior work has reported favorable outcomes, large-scale studies comparing return rates across both surgical approaches and sport types remain limited. METHODS:We retrospectively analyzed 1,115 athletically participant THA patients and compared rates of returning to sports up to one year postoperatively. Survey data captured sport type, participation at four time points, frequency, exertion, and perceived recovery. Patients were stratified by surgical approach: posterior (PA) (n = 519), anterior (AA) (n = 556), and lateral (LA) (n = 50). RESULTS:Preoperatively, 45.2% of patients were active in at least one sport versus 43.7% at one year postoperatively; 73.2% of preoperative athletes returned, and 23.3% of those previously inactive took up sports. Return-to-sport rates were 68.1, 77.0, and 81.8% for PA, AA, and LA, respectively (Chi-square = 3.42, P = 0.181). There were no significant differences between AA and PA, and the lateral approach was not statistically comparable due to a smaller sample size. Low-impact sports had significantly higher return rates than high-impact sports (72.4 versus 50.0%; P < 0.001). At survey completion (> one year postoperatively), satisfaction rates were high across all sports, and activity restrictions were reported by about one in five patients, regardless of approach. Sport-specific outcomes showed that most patients maintained or improved performance. CONCLUSION/CONCLUSIONS:Patients undergoing THA can expect high return rates and satisfaction with athletic endeavors. Surgical approach generally does not affect return-to-sport outcomes after THA. Most patients, regardless of approach, resumed or exceeded preoperative activity. In addition to high return rates among previously active patients, many previously inactive patients participated in sports after THA, highlighting the role of THA in enabling sport resumption and participation.

BACKGROUND:This study compares clinical and functional outcomes between simultaneous hardware removal during total knee arthroplasty (TKA) and staged TKA after prior hardware removal. METHODS:We retrospectively reviewed 155 patients who had prior knee hardware and underwent elective primary TKA between 2012 and 2024 at an urban academic institution. Patients were categorized into "simultaneous" removal during TKA (n = 127) or "staged" TKA after removal (n = 28), and stratified by hardware type (minor/moderate/major). RESULTS:Simultaneous procedures involved significantly less "major hardware," single incisions, and tibial stem extensions than staged procedures (32.3 versus 78.6%, P < 0.001; 81.9 versus 100%, P = 0.007; and 0.8 versus 10.7%, P = 0.019, respectively). Hardware, particularly the major type, was more often retained or partially retained in the simultaneous group (48.0 versus 21.4%, P = 0.008). Reoperation, revision, and infection rates did not significantly differ based on timing or hardware location. Simultaneous patients had smaller 3-month Patient-Reported Outcomes Measurement Information System (PROMIS) Pain Intensity and Interference score reductions (-1.6 versus -9.9, P = 0.006 and +0.4 versus - 7.2, P = 0.007, respectively), but greater 2-year Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement improvements (+25.0 versus - 1.1, P = 0.006) compared to staged patients. Simultaneous major hardware removal demonstrated significantly greater 2-year Knee Injury and Osteoarthritis Outcome Score for Joint Replacement and PROMIS Pain Interference improvement (+32.0 versus -5.5, P = 0.001, and -6.2 versus +5.8, P = 0.027, respectively), but smaller 2-week PROMIS Pain Intensity score reduction (+2.2 versus -4.9, P = 0.050) compared to staged procedures. CONCLUSIONS:Simultaneous hardware removal during TKA led to higher retained major hardware rates and fewer single incisions than staged procedures, without increased reoperation or revision risks. Despite higher 3-month pain scores, simultaneous surgery achieved greater 2-year functional improvement, suggesting it offers advantages for select patients.